Please take a moment and make a financial contribution to TheFunded. If we have helped you, help us with resources to further grow the both the site and our entrepreneur training program, The Founder Institute.

OVP Venture Partners CERTIFIED

No New Investments Warning:
Members have submitted information that the following organization(s) may not be making investments into new portfolio companies. This warning can be contested by submitting proof of a completed investment in a new portfolio company within the last four weeks here.

Firm Rating:

Rated 2.6 / 5.0 by 33

TrackRecord

2.4

OperatingCompetence

2.4

PitchingEfficiency

2.8

FavorableDeal Terms

2.8

ExecutionAssistance

2.6

Firm Homepage:

FIRM OVERVIEW: Medium Private VC founded in 1983 based out of Kirkland, USA (US West)

FIRM DESCRIPTION: In our 26th year, OVP has a passion for working with ground-breaking entrepreneurs and is known for its track record and personal integrity.
The firm is the most experienced and successful venture fund in the Pacific Northwest, with 22 IPOs and 30 M&A events in our history.
We focus on early-stage companies in clean tech, communications and networking, digital biology, digital media & Internet, software, electronics, and nano-technology.
We always lead or co-lead our investments, and go on the Board of every start-up we back - offering each entrepreneur our experience, guidance and contacts to grow their business.

Pitched OVP and they seemed very interested during the meeting. Followed up weeks later to get feedback and never got any sort of status update. OVP please follow the golden rule and simply have your administrative assistant email the entrepreneurs yes or no. Entrepreneurs have very thick skin..we can handle bad news; but we have no patience for lack of follow up after we have given you our valuable time.

Posted by
tech_vp
on 2007-05-24

Posted by
Krassen
on 2008-12-28

PUBLIC:

OVP led our financing at NanoString, very regular VC firm in manners. Historical performance of OVP is terrible (most funds in the bottom quartile, with exception of OVP IV in the 90s), and from my experience this is not a fluke. Nevertheless, they somehow manage to raise tons of money from LPs, which needs to be deployed, so it's probably worth pitching to them. However, if you close with them, make sure to minimize their influence on the business, or the money you raise may come at the cost of ruining your startup.

Posted by
r2d2
on 2007-09-27

PUBLIC:

Having dealt with OVP for a few years I can say, only take their money if you do the deal with Chad Waite and he serves on your BOD. He is smart and does not have a big ego. They others .... I would pass.

Posted by
Anon
on 2008-01-09

Posted by
Krassen
on 2009-01-15

PUBLIC:

My review of OVP received a healthy dose of feedback by people who found it instructional as a general scenario. Here I offer some more thoughts and advice about about my experience being "fired for cause" by OVP, which is what got the most attention, and which too, may have implications in dealing with VCs in general.

Posted by
Krassen
on 2012-03-27

OVP's only IPO in the past 10+ years was Complete Genomics. Take a look at these blog posts to see how much hope and excitement it generated inside the firm:

The beauty of Asymmetric Warfare: "...their business model - selling the complete sequencing of human genomes as a service for just thousands of dollars each - is an asymmetric attack on the large firms selling machines for upwards of a million dollars each to do a similar function. Those firms have no straightforward way to defend against this small, nimble player who is playing by different rules."
http://www.ovp.com/blog/entrepreneurs...

Sadly, Complete Genomics have been a disaster, bleeding money and missing sales targets, so now OVP has cried "uncle" and is liquidating the holding at a huge loss.

With their 2001 fund having -16.9% IRR (that is negative 16.9%), and their last fund (from 2006) already at six years and not a single exit to show for, I think the game is over for this pathetic outfit.

Now, they have been in trouble previously, and were rescued by the Kenyon College endowment, where the dad of OVP's Chad Waite had set up a committee to invest in venture capital. However, I doubt it is going to work this time. For one, I have alerted the Kenyon College alumni community of what is going on. And second, it seems like Waite is retiring in Montana.

As with many firms, your traction with OVP will depend significantly on who you are dealing with.

They are an active investor in my company and I find that their website gives a very good indication of what their culture is like - or what they strive for it to be.

They are also a firm who remember what the "V" stands for in VC, so if your opportunity is a little bit different, they are definitely worth contacting - and they won't expect you to submit them to death-by-powerpoint if they are interested in the general idea.

Posted by
How_Matters
on 2010-10-06

PUBLIC:

Pitched to Mark and Chad. Very relaxed atmosphere, they paid attention (no texting or email thank goodness!) and asked reasonable questions that showed they were listening. They offered some advice regarding how I could have made the pitch better, including "We can see why this would be a nice-to-have, but what would make it a must-have?". Fair question. The meeting ended with them saying they would consider next steps and get back to me. I followed up with thank you email and several "must-have" examples. Weeks went by with no word. Sent another email asking for thumbs up/down. Weeks later no word.

To those of us active in raising capital, the lack of response and going dark is expected behavior in the VC world. It's still disappointing, especially when you meet with folks who actually seem to have decent people skills...

Posted by
eburnssr
on 2009-01-16

PUBLIC:

I always go by what Harry Truman said, you shouldn't little of what you read and only half of what you hear.

So this morning I was reading about OVP one someone getting fired for cause but then I went to the site, sent the material required by their site and the information is of such nature, that unless you're an Internet expert you're going to ask some questions. None were asked and I get this somewhat email stating they're going to pass.

Now would you think that a startup that needs $5 Million but will generate $127 Million in revenue on its 4th year be of some interest.